Why Don't Women Ask Men Out on First Dates?

There are two ways to attempt to initiate a romantic relationship: either by making a direct verbal proposal (e.g., "Would you like to go out on a date with me Saturday night?"), or, to display primarily non-verbal signals that indicate interest and receptivity and wait for the other person to do the asking. The first method has been termed a "risky initiative" (Farrell, 1986), the latter nonverbal flirting behaviors are often called "proceptive behaviors" (Moore, 1985; 2002).

First Time Risky Relationship Initiatives

First time risky initiatives are direct and unambiguous requests that have not been made previously, and that will either be clearly accepted or rejected. Because risky initiatives are unambiguous, they cannot be misinterpreted. In the film "When Harry Met Sally" Harry makes a risky initiative that Sally finds offensive, so he says "I take it back." Sally replies: "You can't take it back, it is already out there." First time risky initiatives are especially salient because the initiator has no previous history of acceptance by the target person. Because the response to the initiation is uncertain, Farrell (1986, p 126) noted: "The 'first time' is the most important time, when the risk of rejection is by far the greatest."

Nonverbal Proceptive Signaling

In contrast, proceptive relationship initiation signals are typically open to various interpretations. In the film "The Graduate" Mrs. Robinson gives proceptive nonverbal signals to her daughter's friend Ben, who says: "You are trying to seduce me, Mrs. Robinson. Aren't you?" (italics added) The potential ambiguity of proceptive signals leaves the signaler less open to direct personal rejection since such initiations can be seen as either an initiation, or as just very friendly behavior. Monica Moore (1985; 2002) has catalogued a variety of nonverbal proceptive behaviors, including smiling, brief glances, raising of the eye brows, hair flips, drawing attention to attractive parts of the body, etc. Clark (2008) found that the use of nonverbal "proceptive behaviors" generally makes someone of the opposite sex more attractive. However, these behaviors were rated to be most effective when they are performed by women, rather than by men.

While women sometimes do make risky first time relationship initiatives, men have traditionally been expected to make the great majority of them. Men generally have done the asking for a first date, while women have generally given proceptive signals of interest or receptivity to such a request. If a woman accepts a first date, men have been expected to make additional first time risky relationship and sexual initiatives as their relationship develops (Farrell, 1986).

For example, if a newly dating, heretofore platonic heterosexual couple, go out for the first time on a movie date together, the woman might signal her willingness to hold hands proceptively -- perhaps by placing her hand on the chair arm rest next to him. If he actually reaches out to hold her hand, that would be considered a risky first time initiative. His intent cannot be misinterpreted, nor could her acceptance or rejection.

Here are a few brief video clips from television shows of males making risky initiatives, females engaging in nonverbal proceptive signaling, and a brief clip from an interview with social psychologist Monica Moore describing proceptive signaling. (Heads up: audio is a bit out of sync.)

Today, Are Women Asking Men Out on First Dates? No.

One might think that after decades of increasing equality between the sexes, women might be doing more of the asking. To see if this is the case, I recently conducted a study, along with two of my students, Agata Janiszewska and Leslie Zabala, to check on the frequency that each sex wanted to either be asked out, or wanted to do the asking, and the actual number of times each sex had done so in the last year. We administered an online survey to 87 heterosexuals (31 males, 55 females), most of whom were undergraduate college students (Mills, Janiszewska & Zabala, 2011). Most of the survey participants had been single in the past year, or, if they were in a relationship, they were asked to think back to the last year that they were single.

The first question we asked was whether they preferred to ask someone out, or would rather be asked out on a date.

Percentage of males and females who would prefer to be asked out, or ask someone out.

As noted in the histogram, a great majority of the women, 93%, preferred to be asked out -- only 6% perferred to do the asking. The majority of men preferred to do the asking, 83%, while 16% preferred to be asked out on a date. It is interesting that more men preferred to be asked out (16%) than there were women who preferred to do the asking (6%). That difference suggests that 10% of men may be waiting quite a while for a woman to ask them out on a first date.

Preferences are one thing, but what about actual behavior? We asked the survey participants how many times they had asked someone out on a first date in the past year.

Number of times subjected asked someone out on a date in the last year

As can be seen in the histogram, males reported significantly more instances of asking someone out in the past year. On average males asked four women out on a first date in the past year. In contrast, most females did not ask anyone out on a first date in the past year.

We also asked how many times the survey participants had been asked out on a first date in the past year. On average, males reported that they had been asked out about once. Females reported that, on average, they had been asked out about 5 times.

Number of times subjected has been asked out on a date in the last year

Men of my generation, who went to college in the 70s and 80s, mostly embraced the goals of the feminist movement. Greater equality, or at least equity, between the sexes seemed fair. And, from a male perspective, there might be some benefits for us as well -- including less inhibited female sexuality and the anticipation that women would begin asking us out on first dates. So we waited. And waited... and... we are still waiting!

So, after decades of increasing sexual equality, why are women not assuming equal "risky initiatives" responsibilities? Even if doing so can be at times anxiety provoking and sometimes result in painful rejections that are difficult not to take personally, wasn't one of the goals of women's movement "equal rights, equal responsibilities?" Over this time period, many other aspects of gender-role behaviors have indeed changed -- for example more women than men attend college today. However, this part of the courtship script -- female indirect nonverbal proceptive signaling and male direct verbal initiation -- apparently has not much changed. This suggests that something deeper than arbitrary social gender role assignments may be involved in the development and persistence of this robust sex difference. The reasons for the persistence of this sex difference may be largely beyond our awareness because they involve evolved psychological adaptations that operate below consciousness. We may be able to articulate what we desire and what we find aversive, but we don't know why we have these feelings.

One explanation for this sex difference may be what I call "female reputational defense theory." From an evolutionary perspective, males and females have faced different reproductive opportunities and constraints due to fundamental biological sex differences in reproductive rate ( M > F) and in confidence of genetic parentage ( F > M) (see Mealey, 2000). These differences have led to the evolution of sexual dimorphic psychological adaptations related to a variety of behaviors, including courtship (Symons, 1979).

Humans as a species have very high levels of obligate parental investment. Further, ancestral men could invest in their offspring by providing meat (a dense source of protein and calories). They could also offer protection and socialization of their children. Human male parental investment is thus generally highly prized by women, and it is a reproductive resource over which females, particularly in monogamous societies, will vigorously compete. To attract a high value reproductive partner, females demonstrate the qualities that males desire in a long term mate, in particular: fertility, health, and sexual fidelity (Buss, 2011).

It is the latter quality, sexual fidelity, that is of relevance here. Because males suffer from genetic paternity insecurity (they are uncertain of which children are genetically their own), males should pay particular attention to cues that may forecast the future sexual fidelity of a potential long term mate. Ancestral males that were unconcerned about monitoring cues that may have forecast future female infidelity were presumably more likely to misallocate time and resources investing in children to whom they were genetically unrelated.

Derogating a female's sexual reputation

Females can increase their mate value by giving cues that generally forecast future sexual fidelity to a long term mate. For example, adolescent females avoid friendships with females who have been identified by others as promiscuous (Lees, 1993), because, by association, such friendships may have a negative effect on their own sexual reputation. Physical assaults between women are often motivated by accusations of promiscuity (Campbell, 1986). Dosmukhambetova and Manstead (2011) found that, in the context of impressing potential long term mating partners, women were likely to try to distance themselves from promiscuous females, and they also expressed more negative emotional reactions (compared to men) toward a female who showed a tendency to be unfaithful. These studies lend support to "female reputational defense theory" -- females actively attempt to impress potential long term mating partners by offering evidence that they would be a sexually faithful partner.

The results of our study may also be interpreted as an effort by women to protect their sexual reputation. By refraining from making first time relationship initiatives, women may be providing evidence to potential long term mates that they would not make the first move with another man in the future, given their history of not doing so in the past.

So, if women have a natural tendency to avoid making direct, verbal first time relationship initiatives, should they be relieved of "equal responsibilities" in this area? That is an intriguing question. We certainly don't let men use the "but it is only natural" excuse to justify some of their more antisocial behaviors. Should we give women "a sexual inequality pass" because it is just one part of a natural courtship script? Or, should we encourage women to make more risky initiatives? Should men go on a "risky initatives" strke? Should we ask women to "woman up" -- put their fragile egos on the line, get some ovaries, get out there and start asking out men on first dates?

...men want to be the chaser rather than the chased, and smart women, no matter how liberated, have learned to go with what works. When I was younger I often directly asked men out on dates. The answer was always, "No." My friends, both male and female, told me that this was an "aggressive" move and that I was "doing the man's job." I noticed more success when I simply flirted and left an encounter saying, "I hope we run into each other again." After a few dates, I found that the men were more open to me doing the inviting and offering to pay. Coming of age in the 1970's, I found this extremely annoying, but as the old saying goes, you have to go along to get along.

...women want to be the chaser rather than the chased, and smart men, no matter how liberated, have learned to go with what works. When I was younger I often directly asked women out on dates. The answer was always, "No." My friends, both male and female, told me that this was an "aggressive" move and that I was "doing the woman's job". "A woman will chase a man until she lets him catch her," I was told. I noticed more success when I simply flirted and left an encounter saying, "I hope we run into each other again." After a few dates, I found that the women were more open to me doing the inviting and offering to pay. Coming of age in the 1970's, I found this extremely annoying, but as the old saying goes, you have to go along to get along.

This is no longer true in the younger generation, especially among the highly educated. If a woman below 30 today initiates with a man below 30, he is most likely to say "yes".

This is from a sample of 165 males at a prestigious university where I did this study as part of a class project two years ago. Only 22 males from the 165 said that they would reject the woman. Interestingly, all of those 22 were international students or students from rural US or conservative backgrounds.

Your mileage may vary, but it is actually very attractive to most educated men to see a self-confident secure woman asking him out.

Yeppers with you on this one - don't take my word for it, but I and a lot of my friends find a confident woman who can take care of herself very attractive, so ladies, make the first move if you have to!

Nice try, Bobloblaw, but you are NOT going to "shame" those "pathetic" men into asking women out. If the woman asks you out, then you at least know that she is interested and will NOT call the police. It must be really HORRIBLE for women to have to show some honest interest up front.

I've never asked women out, or pursued them in my life. They have always made the first move. I wasn't even trying to attract them. And it felt quite flattering really. It felt especially flattering because I wasn't trying. I was just being good at what I do (math, dancing etc.) and they were naturally attracted to me.

It would be interesting to learn what the average rates of getting a "no" are for male and female "risky initiators." I am not familiar with any research on this, although, I would imagine some research on speed dating may have some data on this.

I have recently written about this topic on my own blog here at Psychology Today. According to research by Hald and Høgh-Olesen (2010), men who are "risky initiators" and ask a woman out have about a 43% acceptance rate among single women. Women who are "risky initiators" and ask men out, however, have a 68% acceptance rate among single men.

So, when women do ask, men appear to respond positively. Incidentally, the odds for men hearing a yes are pretty good as well. Clearly, being a risky initiator (of either gender) has a benefit. Food for thought for those following a more proceptive strategy and not finding the success they would like.

I enjoy reading your posts as well. Such constructive sharing among bloggers is a potential benefit of being under the Psychology Today banner. I hope to participate in more of it. Perhaps, as time goes on, we can find further areas for collaboration.

I kind of agree with the above comment. Women would probably ask more men out on dates if they didn't judge women as "easy" for asking in the first place. It follows the logic laid out in your article, if women show their lack of taking risky initiatives as proof that they won't take any in the future then asking a man out on a date would somehow imply her promiscuity.

Women actually do or don't do a lot of things because of our awareness of how harshly men will judge us for doing or not doing them.

However, I asked a guy out recently, and he said yes. Here's hoping he didn't say yes because he thought my asking was proof I was easy.

Stop making excuses for your gender, FUCKTARD! Women and girls don't ask because they know they don't have to! As long as "men" continue to do their asking (thanks for NOTHING, bitch moms!) for them, bitches will NEVER do the asking, because they are sexist and cheap punks and cowards striving to protect their egos and purses! In addition to lying your ASS off about men thinking you're "easy" (you sure love it when MEN are easy!) you pretend to not see the difference. Even a man who is hot by any standard has an excellent chance of spending his life alone if he does' nt ask. This has NEVER happened to even a woman who is a total and complete pig, but who, of COURSE, fancies herself a queen and princess thanks to what mommy has told her! Imagine a life where your vagina, as well as gender conditioning and (in this imaginary world) male knowledge of the HUGE advantage of making the other gender play it's cards first, kept YOU from EVER experiencing what it felt like to be asked out! That is exactly what you coward ass and heartless bitches have done to males! Don't even THINK about trying to shame me, BITCH! You flea-males are totally the reason why men like me feel the way we do! You would gladly consign ALL males to lives alone before even ONCE risking your fat ass flea-male egos or cracking open your purses! That is why so many of you sluts go through males like water, and wind up alone and cat ladies at 80! You are'nt just super picky and demand the world's oceans from men like me while not offering a grain of sand from a beach yourselves, but you VICIOUSLY turn down men like me who DWARF you in every category, and whose asses you are'nt fit to WIPE after a CRAP! You also seem to absolutely love disguising your availability, making it IMPOSSIBLE to find you alone so conversation can take place, and saying "no" in front of your friends AND his. Don't be disingenuous! You know JUST what I mean. The chance to rebuff the hot guy and look like the desirable QUEEN! You are'nt robots, you are NO-BOTS! The only fucking word you uneducated and man hating bitches KNOW is NO! Differences in feelings, unwanted pregnancies, and STD's are the problems! Men WANT you to be easy, dumb ass! It FINALLY gives them a break from constantly sacrificing their egos, which leads to sacrificing their money because cheap cows don't respect male money, and won't pay their fucking share! Why do you think so many men worldwide have gone MGTOW, and so many women are unhappy and alone!? You women continue to fight HARD to keep men like me from EVER getting what females take for granted. You are not only SUPER sexist and man hating, but you have lost ALL willingness to flirt, flatter, and compliment in kind, gentle, humble, and feminine ways, and really MEAN what you are saying! Mike, you are nothing but an ENABLER of females when you call this "sex differences." These are tried and true cultural phenomena! These behaviors, omissions, commissions, and refusals worked for mommy, so she passes them on to her daughters, and rationalizes away the harm she does to her own SONS! SMFH! BTW: For any of you bitches who try to fight back with the usual accusations of (1. Never gets laid. (2. Gay (3. Hates women, or (4. Impotent, forget it! I am great looking, especially for being in my 60's, have a boat load of money, like men for friends, (with damn good reasons) but sleep ONLY with women, and LOVE you women, but HATE your man hating and suck ass "gimme" attitudes, and have eight inch erections! Because I was married (until she passed away five years ago) to a fabulous and wonderful professional woman for 35 years, it just makes you greedy and special privilege skanks stand out more than ever!

I wonder if there is significant variation on the rate of risky initiatives given or received between men and women among subjects of different age groups, educational level, income, religious affiliation, ethnicity/race/nationality, and etc. I'm sure personality traits like extroversion and introversion probably have some role to play in this dynamic as well.

All an all I completely agree that more research should be done on this topic.

I'm a woman and I ask men out on dates simply because I want what I want when I want it and I dislike playing games. I have noticed 2 results.

1) If I have asked a man out and the date goes well, I find the men often put less effort into the relationship as in making me do more of the asking for future dates, spending as little money as possible and not hesitating to request I help them out with a bevy of their personal challenges such as computer issues, fixing their gadgets and conflicts with various billing agencies. In essence, these men are very interested in what I can do for them and not much on what they can do for me.

On a side note on this, I have discussed this dilemma with some male friends of mine and they say that when they ask a woman on a date the same issues crop up. So this may not be a gender problem, but more of a self-interest problem.

2) I have witnessed some men immediately reject the idea of a date with me simply because I am a woman and they are a man, and they are woefully uncomfortable with a woman asking them out even if it is to do something they want to do on a day they are available to do it.

There's a simple explanation for this... Consider the watch paradox: Let's say you spend $500 on a really nice watch. It's a super-discount closeout, so no returns are possible.

A month later (Case A) something comes up, you're in a jam and short of cash, so you decide to try and liquidate the watch. In many parts of the world people have stored value in jewelry they can hold rather than trust it to banks, but you know the cash-for-jewelry places will only give you $100, which isn't enough. So you decide to try and take your chances on the street corner, hassling people walking by trying to sell it. Obviously you have to take a steep discount when finally someone stops and shows some interest. You take $200.

The alternative reality version (Case B) is the opposite situation. You're passing thru that same street corner NOT needing to sell anything, when someone spots you wearing the watch and starts wanting to try and buy it off you after you tell him they were likely not still available any more. He's really taken by the watch, so he starts bidding you up above where the supposed retail price was (which you knew had to be inflated to begin with). It is a nice watch, but you decide $1250 would be nicer, so you sell the watch.

The moral? The person who initiates the transaction is in the inferior position.

That's what women require of men by employing a passive strategy. They never really wanted "equality", they thought they were superior to begin with and are only interested in men who will validate this. (More and more "proof" is manufactured for them everyday.) It's essentially a power play, with woman only willing to take the one-up side of the script.

Sex roles and power plays are two of "the three most destructive forces militating against the achievement of satisfactory loving relationships between men and women" (Claude Steiner) because the two people agree from the start they are unequal. Obviously there's little room in such a framework for the man who considers himself an equal of, or superior to, a given woman. Thus women get the inferior knuckle-dragging subservient they want.

This used to work way back when courting meant trying to appeal to the woman's father (and other kin), but is now almost entirely dysfunctional.

One more observation: women often engage in what's called "initiative transfer", where they will make only the first move -- such as saying "Hi" -- and then expect everything else to proceed according to the script as if the man had been the initiator. Such attempted manipulation, which men almost always get at some level, suggests the state of "girl game" is still really lame.

I'm a woman and I've been through both types of situations quite a few times - being asked out and asking a guy out. Both of them were sometimes enjoyable experiences, sometimes awkward or painful (both being rejected and being the one who rejects are uncomfortable for me).

What I've learned until now is that if a guy rejects me simply because he is not comfortable with this non-typical dating script, I'm probably not losing much of an opportunity for a good relationship - the kind of partner I want is one who doesn't stumble in gender stereotypes like this. Also, if he says yes and then enters the predominantly passive role, I'll lose interest after a while; but then again the same thing happens if he's exaggeratedly active and doesn't leave me any space to take some initiative.

I don't see that I'm at disadvantage if I ask a guy out; on the contrary, I feel good about myself when I act spontaneously instead of simply following cultural scripts; and sometimes the guys to whom I made the first step explicitly told me that they see this as a sign of inner strength. Some of them will be attracted to this, some will not; this is beyond my control. Sure, I could try to manipulate my way into a man's heart, but then I would lose the authenticity I'm looking for in my close relationships - be they romantic or not.

Also, when a guy makes the first step towards me, I don't see him as being 'one-down'. I just sometimes see them as putting themselves 'one-down' through their attitude (for example, saying that he agrees with me on some points he actually doesn't, just to impress me, is actually a sign that he doesn't trust himself enough to think that I would like him for who he really is; and this message is sent in subtle and unconscious ways, but has quite an impact on the relationship).

So I don't see this whole 'one-up' - 'one-down' as inherent to relationships. Sadly, I agree with Steiner's observation that most of us are raised to see this inequality as natural and even look for it. I recognize the same tendency in myself sometimes, so I'm not asking from anybody else to be completely "cured" of it. I just very much appreciate those who strive for genuine equality in their relationships, be they men or women :)

As a man, I think this is so well said. Who needs power? You are above the mean. The fact that you ask men out, I think, clearly makes you sensitive the the rejection experience. Many women are not, and are pretty ungraceful.

Unattractive AND wearing a fedora? I could understand an unattractive implication; but the fedora remark was very random. A little humorous, being so out of left field and all.

Look, I see this happen to men all the time. They speak the truth and are met with ad hominem and/or shaming language. I'm too mature to say anything negative without having met you yet. Call me mature, but that's how I operate.

Since my initial comment, I have entered a relationship. But unlike the past, I was very selective. I chose a woman that isn't typical of her gender. She truly is unique in that she doesn't expect to have her cake and eat it, too. It's been over a year now and her attitude hasn't changed.

You can usually tell you're on the right path when the only things your opposition can do is resort to insults, which is very typical among the traditionalists when someone simply disagrees with them. I've received these insults myself, but I usually just ignore them.

Actually I would like to ask where the moderation is when it comes to posts like that, since the people on the other side of this issue are starting to show their fangs. The pick up artist community are even worse with the insults when criticizing them.

I've taught yoga for over 29 years and you should see how these women come on to me, but I know better...they are absolute teases.

When a female takes the initiative (asks us out, takes the FIRST kiss, undoes the FIRST button, caresses the FIRST private part, emphasis on the word FIRST) to me that's signifies that she is very liberated, self confident and clear headed.. and she doesn't have to wait for just any old guy to ask her out, (the guy usually drinks to lesson the rejection he gets)...You are losing the paradigm...Men are the ACTORS and women the RE-ACTORS and so therefore women will NEVER be at fault since they've only reacted to his action!!!, they NEVER started anything....

Dude boycott women, let them find out what it is to take the initiative and constantly get rejected. Read Dr. Herb Goldberg PhD's books, THE HAZARDS OF BEING MALE and Dr. Warren Farrell PhD's books THE MYTH OF MALE POWER and WHY MEN ARE THE WAY THEY ARE...watch a great movie on YouTube nor Netflix called HER LIFE AS A MAN where Judith Regan did a Tootsie Reversal and found out that she hated being a man. She was editor-in-chief of a wanna be magazine REAL LIFE. I have a copy that Judith Regan herself sent me...but she is a manipulator and a very rich woman publisher now because she uses men.

Duhh...wake up...and by the way I love Fedora's I have 32 of em and believe me I get complemented for wearing 'em with a nice tie and vest and a tuxedo white shirts and nice slacks or nice gym pants (50 shades of grey) and I make Bowties out my less fun ties..and in summer I make a fashion statement, no shirt...,(doing Yoga makes you look nice and buffed, all in the right places...So its just tie, vest, nice slacks and of course my sexy Fedora...

Great post, Mark! Women want it both ways. We have to "work for it", "earn it" and "make the first move" or we should be punished. If
we fail other tests, we must be punished. If the approach is flawed,
then we must be punished. I gave up long ago. They are not worth it!

I too gave up on dating a long time ago, due to women never asking me out on a date. However, technology will compensate for this in the somewhat near future, in the way of robots with AI. I would sooner use something like that than put up with the garbage of dating.

First of all, you men and other people view women as maneaters, female cads, tools, slags, etc. if they make the first move and snap. Second of all, you people think it's okay for a man to be needy, desperate, clingy, and possessive while a woman should be indifferent, cold, aloof, disinterested, helpless, less intelligent, less assertive, passive-aggressive, quiet, and distant while the man makes the first move and helps the woman. And this is why women never ask men out on dates in every culture because of these attitudes. And yes, we condemn man-eating women more often than men in the same manner with women. Another thing, we allow men to ask married, engaged, or committed women out on dates and/or have relationships with them as well and we glorify men fighting other men over women, not the other way around.

Men hate being objectified by women because it hurts their egos. They want to be the boss. And you should never show interest in a man at first if you're a woman nor smile. You look slutty. Be a cold, aloof, mysterious, uninterested, unattainable, emotionally unavailable woman. Men like that a lot and will stalk you for it.

The behavior of homosexuals can sometimes be particularly enlightening in that they do not have to compromise with the different reproductive strategies of the opposite sex. Thus, with the exception of sexual orientation itself, it can provide a window into each sexes preferences in "pure form."

Gay males tend to have far more sexual partners than do lesbians. Part of the reason may be that men are more willing to take risky initiatives to proposition someone.

Lesbians sometimes complain that no one is making the first move. There is also the term "lesbian bed death" in which sex becomes more infrequent in long term lesbian relationships -- again, perhaps in part because both are giving proceptive signals but are not making risky initiatives.

The simple fact is that in our screwed up patriarchal society a woman taking the initiative is a threat as women are meant to be mere vehicles for male line inheritance rather than sexual beings in their own right - so much blah blah we know but it still affects us. Remember it's not so long ago that women had no rights at all and weren't even supposed to enjoy sex. We live in the aftermath of this vast injustice where 'good girls' are still passive creatures waiting for men to make a move and bad girls ie transgressive of the staus quo, are deemed whores so asking a man out equals 'she's going to have sex on the first date' Every woman I know feels this and nobody wants to give that signal especially given the level of sexual violence out there - as in it's so easy to get a rape conviction. Add to that the whole power thing of being the asker not the askee - men would not want to give up that advantage.
But really the whole set up is ridiculous and simply means that interaction is prevented from being spontaneous. Anyone should be able to ask anyone else out, the end. I just wonder how many times a more outgoing woman has waited in vain for a shy guy to find the courage to ask whereas she could've broken the ice easily were it not for this crippling nonsense. What a bore....

Very very nice and cute girl at work, i can fully tell she wants me, shes always asking me questions bout my family and what i used to do.

Always giving weird complimements as well. Like about my car etc, always " Ohhh its sooooo nice, i like it ! "

" You look very nice driving your car adam!! "

" I think your car is the real you, its very intersting! "

These are things she has said to me constantly to start a converstaion etc etc.
Basically I think that she did this because it was the only thing she could figure out that i would respond to or like ? Which was totally wrong.

All she had to do was say..

" Adam, would you like to go out for dinner sometime ? I think your very nice and handsome. "

(she has actually said constantly that im sooo nice and handsome as well with massive smiles.)

The thing is, i am sick of asking women out and have basically for the last 10 years REFUSED to ask women out I KNOW WANT ME just to prove a point to myself.

It sucks to all hell because some of these women would hav ebeen the best wives and mothers you could ever want. All i had to do was ask one of them out, but i never did because of my annoyance that "I" have to do "everything" when there is so much

"women equallity" crap going around.

So yeah, basically a ton of women would have had their man that they wanted, yet they never asked me............

Come on, man. If you knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that a woman wanted to go out with you, she did initiate something, she is the one who made the first move, and she did let you know, even if it wasn't literal. To deny yourself potential happiness on a nonsense technicality is ridiculous. It sounds like you just enjoy watching other people squirm for your amusement. Also it's not important if you turned down potentially great mothers or just career-oriented women unless the entire point is to brag about how useful your sperm could be if you ever granted someone the privilege. If you truly wanted a chance to be with any of these women, the last thing you would've been worrying about is whether the person who went out of their way to make it clear they had a crush on you specifically mentioned dinner reservations.

I find it ironic that despite the feminist movement's outright hatred of woman being objectified, the majority of women who identify themselves as 'feminists' still prefer men to pursue them. The irony here is that the paradigm of men pursuing women is the one thing which initially puts women in the position of being objectified to begin with. I still place the majority of this blame on men though who seem to have a sexist attitude towards women who do make a first move on them (when that actually happens that is). I can tell you one thing however, this is an issue that more 'feminists' should take seriously, since most of their gender inequality concerns are initially fueled by this topic. Personally I'm shocked that this is still even an issue at all in the year 2012, let alone a major issue like it is.

There is no such thing as "objectification." Humans are not sexually attracted to objects. Such people are mentally ill and are called "objectophiliac." Feminist theorists took "objectification" from Marx where he said the worker at the factory was turned into an object, a cog in the machine, dehumanized; feminists replaced the worker with the female and his objectification (which also doesn't exist, Marx made it up as agitprop) with "sexual objectification", based on the idea that males find certain female body shapes more attractive.

Just because certain female body parts correlate with fertility and are therefore more attractive to males doesn't mean males "objectify" females. This was a cornerstone of feminism's plan to demonize male sexuality as inherently, completely evil. They eventually followed this to its logical conclusions, claiming that all "PIV" (penis inside vagina) was rape, all heterosexual sex was an expression of men's patriarchal domination and subjugation of females, and that all females must become lesbians. You can read all of this in the books of Germaine Greer, Catherine McKinnen, Andrea Dworkin, and the like. The depiction of all males as violent rapists and all of male sexuality as brutish violence was therefore complete. This demonization trickled down to society and general culture, not in its complete, utter lunacy like in those books, but more than enough, that we justify ignoring decades of research proving gender symmetry in DV and pass sexist laws like VAWA based on falsehoods; that we justify court ordering a 13-year old boy to pay child support to his 40 year old female rapist who got pregnant.

"I still place the majority of this blame on men though who seem to have a sexist attitude towards women who do make a first move"

It is AMAZING that after saying what you said, you still found a way to blame men!

"I can tell you one thing however, this is an issue that more 'feminists' should take seriously"

Wow. You must be living under a rock. Your utter ignorance is astounding. Feminists have been "taking it seriously" since 1848. They are not interested in solving problems. They are interested in creating non-existing problems, and blaming and hating men for it.

Read the "Declaration of Sentiments" from the Seneca Falls Convention of 1848, which reads like a fascist hate manifesto. Every statement begins with "He..." followed by a completely false, hateful statement condemning all men as a class. Just read it with "He" replaced by "blacks" or "jews" etc. It is scary how similar to Nazi propaganda it is.

And you think feminists were genuinely concerned with solving a problem? You are shocked that this is a major issue in 2012? Get real. Feminism has been hell bent on explicit man hating since 1848, possibly earlier. They don't have any "gender inequality concerns." It's all made up so they can blame men for it to justify their hatred.

There’s a simple underlying core reason why women don’t do the asking. As a general consensus encompassing all types, men are more inclined to require/want/accept just physical sex. (Proof: Prostitution clients by a vast majority are male. General behaviour of single gay men versus lesbians). In biological theory, the minimum time it takes for a man to reproduce is related to a successful sexual encounter. For a woman, the minimal time required to be reproductively successful is many years per child. Thus men have evolved in competition with each other resulting in physical sexual needs that drives behaviour. Whereas for women, sex has evolved as part of domestic life to aid her reproductive time course, and thus sex is related to a relationship. This works, as it helps a male’s reproductive strategy to aid in raising his own helpless babies and children, but not necessary solely. Also, testosterone, aggression and sexual urgency all helps in competition and creating behaviour to win choosey female mates.
Thus if a woman is doing the asking, it is a sexual opportunity for men so they need to say yes. A woman is generally looking more for an emotional relationship initiation so it is meaningless for her to ask a man out. A woman would want a man to say yes on the basis that he also sees a potential for a compatible (long term) relationship. When a man asks a woman out, at least one party (i.e. the woman) will be making a judgment call on relationship potential. That is why it is known that it is the woman who really does the choosing (she sends the cues & signals first). It’s all very simple. Despite understanding it all, I can’t ask women out though. We all have different evolutionary pasts and different mixed up genetics and environments, but that is the modelling consensus that forms the social structure & expectations.

Stay MGTOW brother!
Don't give in to feminists and the idiotic women who follow them.
Let them rot in the hell they created.
I too hope females get drafted to the military and go fight and die. Let them experience "true equality."
I bet all those women will instantly get pregnant to get out of military duty!

MGTOW is the only way to go.With the BS laws that govern marriage and LTR's men are best to AVOID women these days.Today's modern women are PARASITES! They cannot be loved or trusted.Live your life to the fullest.Call Girls are the way to go.They have more class than the parasitical modern woman.AVOID modern women at all costs and let them wither away with their cats,booze and vibrators.

Not to mention corrupt family courts. Women initiate 70% of divorces and get custody 90% of the time; along with alimony and child support. Men go to jail when they lose their jobs and cannot pay it.

Since 50% of all marriages end up in divorce, and since even living together with a woman is considered a common law marriage most places, associating with a woman is like playing Russian Roulette with 4 or more bullets in the revolver!

I've been married nearly 25 yrs; however before I met my husband there were a few times I met guys I really liked. If they'd not asked me out, like I wanted, I wasted no time: I'd ask them out. I remember doing it twice. Both times the guy said "Yes," & our 1st date (one for brunch, the other for lunch) was lovely. Both were about 4 years younger than I. Yes, I paid.

But we never went on 2nd dates. Why? I had a personal rule that if the guy is *truly* interested, he'll ask for the 2nd one. (Tho I didn't tell this rule to either guy.) Neither one ever did call me for a 2nd date. I was a bit disappointed, but moved on quickly. My initiative saved a lot of time and game playing. This was in the early '80s.

I think it's interesting that we (feminists) have spent decades fighting about symptoms of sexism, like unequal wages and unrealistic beauty standards, but we never go *anywhere near* the root problem. This is where it all starts. We want to be chased. I get it. I still want to be chased, and I've known better since I was selling Thin Mints. It's so powerful. I literally feel like I'm betraying the whole of my sexuality when I have to initiate. (Yes, I know how messed up that is!) Still, I want to be chased.

The thing is, you don't chase an equal. You chase a toy. You chase your prey. There's no version of being chased that doesn't dehumanize and objectify the target/victim/prey.

I think we're going to have to girl up address this, not just once but constantly for decades and decades, if we want anything like true equality.